The whispers that Microsoft is preparing to launch games and services on Switch are, in some ways, too fantastical to believe; a dream-come-true for fanboys-and-girls of a certain age. The rumoured deal suggests that the company is planning not only to launch Xbox Live and Game Pass integration, but also to publish ‘native’ games (including, it has been reported, Ori and the Blind Forest and Cuphead) and stream others via the company’s much-hyped Project xCloud platform. It all seems so suspiciously pie-in-the-sky that every sliver of new information has us reaching for huge fistfuls of salt. The idea that two of video gaming’s giants could come together and collaborate in such a way feels unprecedented, yet you need only glance at the history books to realise it’s really not as outlandish as it first sounds.

A quick search of this very site yields various complimentary comments about Nintendo from Phil Spencer, Microsoft’s Executive Vice-President of Gaming, and how he’s eager to reach gamers on ‘rival systems’. The companies’ US headquarters are just down the road from each other in Redmond, Washington, and Spencer always has warm words whenever the topic of Nintendo comes up.

This arms-open approach is very different to the previous regime, which designed the original Xbox One and bungled its launch through terrible messaging and a fundamental misread of its audience. While the company’s ‘always-online’ vision of the future is slowly but surely coming to pass, Microsoft’s effort to position the Xbox once again as a multimedia centre came too soon and involved too many compromises from the point of view of their gaming audience. Consequently, the incredible goodwill the company managed to salvage after the 360’s ‘red ring of death’ debacle was squandered through its always-online, Kinect-enabled, secondhand game-foiling foibles.

Conversely, Sony – humbled by the mauling it received after launching the PS3 for $599 – took advantage and raced ahead with PS4. Microsoft stopped officially reporting sales back in 2014, which probably tells you all you need to know, but Sony boasted in January of having sold 91.6 million PS4s to date. While Switch sits at around 32.27 million, it launched less than two years ago and shows year-on-year growth while sales of the ageing home consoles are rapidly declining. VGChartz estimate that Xbox One has sold over 40 million of its various SKUs, less than half of Sony's figure. The point is clear; Microsoft has lost this war against Sony.

It’s also worth remembering that while Xbox 360 ‘beat’ PS3 last generation, the actual numbers are closer than you might imagine. While hearts and minds were won by that console’s incredible catalogue of third-party games coupled with some strong first-party offerings, the final worldwide sales for 360 and PS3 put them within 4.4 million units of each other.

So, while we tend to look back and laugh at Sony’s incredible hubris, PS3 worked its way back to relative sales parity by the end of the seventh generation. While Phil Spencer has been fighting tooth-and-nail to get Microsoft back to those days – refocusing on core gamers and making an effort to humanise the corporation with a personable style that acknowledges the strengths of the competition – even the halcyon days of the 360 aren’t the all-conquering benchmark they’re remembered as.

It’s also worth remembering that the Xbox brand has always been a total non-starter in Japan. Its brashness and boldness make it a hard sell in Japan where, thanks to the perception that it’s a big American product clearly not designed with the Japanese in mind, it has always struggled. In fact, ‘struggle’ is too generous a word – sales are abysmal. According to Famitsu, just 15,339 Xbox Ones were sold in the country in 2018, bringing its estimated lifetime sales to a paltry 102,931 after five years. Microsoft barely even registers in Japan, one of the world's most important gaming markets.

This puts Microsoft in an unenviable position: on the one hand, there’s little incentive to even launch in Japan – the expense of shipping, marketing, and the associated costs of supporting the Xbox infrastructure in the country (where, according to Media Create, just 68 Xboxes were sold the week ending 17th February, compared to 65,958 Switches) means the company is losing money by simply being there. However, if it ever hopes to win over Japanese gamers, Microsoft can’t be seen to abandon the territory, either. Rocks to the left, hard places to the right.

What if there was a way to make inroads into that market that would eliminate much of the expense of selling a big physical box to an audience who historically view it as the physical manifestation of the ignorant, foreign interloper? What if Microsoft could sell its games on hardware that isn’t in direct competition with its own product and that’s already been accepted by that audience, not to mention millions of others around the world? Framed in this way, collaboration rumours make more sense.

Getting games on the lower-spec devices also aligns with Microsoft’s stated intentions. We’ve heard a lot about its plans to branch the Xbox brand out into the cloud and onto a multitude of devices via Project xCloud rather than confining it to the physical box under the telly; indeed, Microsoft is already eyeing a future where we no longer buy gaming hardware, but instead pay a monthly subscription, Netflix-style, and play on pretty much anything that has a screen and a connected wireless pad. With all the processing being done server side, lag is a significant hurdle to overcome, especially with certain games and genres, but Microsoft must be relatively confident they can solve this to the satisfaction of a general audience. Control-wise, Switch is virtually 1:1 with Xbox One (analogue shoulder triggers aside), so no problems there, but streaming relies on one factor above all else: a robust internet connection.

In Japan, we’ve seen streaming-only games on Switch from both Ubisoft (Assassin’s Creed: Odyssey) and Capcom (Resident Evil 7). The country’s digital infrastructure is lightyears ahead of most other nations, mainly thanks to its smaller footprint on the map, and while North American audiences might be eager for it, the infrastructure in that vast continent is either not fit for purpose or, in some areas, completely non-existent.

With 5G slowly rolling out, perhaps Microsoft is betting people won’t be reliant on physical networks for lightning-fast connection speeds, but if it’s putting all its eggs in the streaming basket, Japan is the place to be while the rest of the world slowly catches up.

There’s also another disconnect Microsoft addresses by publishing on Nintendo hardware. When it purchased British developer Rare back in 2002 for $375 million, its intentions were obvious: hijack some of that lucrative younger demographic from Nintendo to compliment the hardcore crowd it had attracted with the likes of Halo: Combat Evolved. The studio behind huge hits like GoldenEye 007 and family-friendly titles like Banjo-Kazooie sounded like just the ticket to expand the Xbox userbase.

That plan never really worked, though; at least not to the extent Microsoft wanted. After the hey-day of the ‘90s, where Rare seemed to be utterly in sync with Nintendo and its audience, the developer arguably struggled to find its groove with Microsoft and the studio’s madcap, irreverent and inescapably British sensibilities have never truly shone on the Xbox platform. The endearing quirks seem to get polished away and, despite glimpses of its former character, there’s still a perception that the studio doesn’t quite fit into Microsoft’s X-shaped box.

Microsoft knows this; it knows it’s sitting on a gold mine of IP that the majority of its customers simply aren’t very interested in. That isn’t to say no-one buys them, but the Venn diagram of Halo, Gears and Forza fans simply doesn’t have enough crossover with gamers who can recite the entire Great Mighty Poo song. There’s a rich vein of nostalgia for the company’s retro output which it attempted to mine with the wonderful Rare Replay compilation but, again, it’s all for nought if the audience for your product is on another console.

Nintendo gamers skew younger, of course, but there are also the thirty/forty-something gamers who miss Rare who’ve embraced the convenience of Switch and would jump at the chance to replay Perfect Dark on a handheld or share Banjo with their kids. Nostalgia for those early polygonal games of the PlayStation/N64 era is peaking; Rare games would sell by the bucketload on Switch.

And if Microsoft and Nintendo can work things out, they’re only a hop-and-a-jump away from – whisper it – GoldenEye 007 escaping from its N64-shaped licensing prison. Whether that dinosaur, a relic of the Cold War, could flourish in the modern gaming world is a conversation for another day, but it’s a tantalising possibility.

Let's also remember that Microsoft already publishes on rival consoles to tap into a different audience; Minecraft is the perfect example where cross-platform partnerships make financial sense, and a deal with Nintendo is similarly logical. Certain signature series already address the Xbox’s audience perfectly, so there’s far less incentive to put Halo on Switch, for example, and even less likelihood of a ‘proper’ Mario game appearing on a non-Nintendo system. The Rare angle, though, would seem to be profitable for both companies, and that's why it makes so much sense.

And money is always the bottom line. If there’s an opportunity to access a market a company isn’t hitting, principles can go out of the window very quickly – that’s business. Exclusivity deals that seemed watertight can suddenly be bent or broken completely. Think back to illustrious ‘Capcom Five’, five GameCube exclusives announced back in 2002. Of those games, only P.N.03 remained GameCube-only; one was cancelled outright, while Killer7, Viewtiful Joe and Resident Evil 4 hopped over to other platforms. Game director Shinji Mikami famously stated he would quit his job, or “cut off his own head” as the loosely-translated Japanese colloquialism goes, if the latter ever made it to another platform. Within nine months of the GameCube release, RE4 was on PlayStation 2 and with the game coming to Switch in May this year, it’s still with us even now; more to the point, so is Mikami-san.

Even the most unlikely, unholy unions can quickly come to pass. If you’d asked a Sega fan at the turn of the millennium if Sonic could ever appear on a Nintendo console, they’d have likely thrown a VMU at you in disgust. By December 2001, though, Sonic Adventure 2 was on GameCube and Sonic Advance on Game Boy Advance. In the shortest of turnarounds, the greatest of rivals became super pals and the unthinkable was a reality.

While we doubt we’ll be seeing Microsoft’s top-tier franchises on Switch, or vice versa, stranger things have happened and there’s a lot of exciting crossover potential in the future. Who knows – a Banjo or Master Chief amiibo might not be as crazy an idea as we thought at the start of the year.

Gavin loves a bit of couch co-op, especially when he gets to delegate roles, bark instructions and give much-appreciated performance feedback at the end. He lives in Spain (the plain-y bit where the rain mainly falls) and his love for Banjo-Kazooie borders on the unhealthy.

Meh. I'm still way over my daily recommended value of sodium regarding this rumor. The article definitely highlights the biggest hurdle to this idea, which is internet throughput. There's still a not-so-insignificant chunk of gamers in the US that simply couldn't take real advantage of stream-based gaming. Then there's the issues of provider-side downtimes. If the Nintendo servers have issues while I'm playing my BotW cart, not an issue; If I'm trying to play Kameo or something and xCloud gets a hiccup....

As both an Xbox and Switch owner I'm excited even though i have access to both of their libraries. The Switch would simply give me more time to play the likes of Ori and Rare Replay which in turn let's me focus on the more demanding games that the Switch can't play when I do get some tv time.

Most Switch owners will benefit even more by having access to games they wouldn't normally with the 2 I mentioned being great and of course Cuphead which is easily one of the best games to come out in recent years.

I'd be all over this if true. I don't own any other console, have always and will always be a Nintendo gamer. However, the thought of having AAA games that wont make it to the switch would be amazing and I'd definitely subscribe for a mere £10 a month or so. If this was to happen, I would personally hope for MS to bring live along too and assist Nintendo with their online infrastructure

"Nintendo gamers skew younger" Not in my experience. Nintendo gamers skew older, and that's one of the reason retro inspired indie games sell so well. We're just forcing it on our children now. Kids are playing Fortnite. We're playing Mario still.

@frogopus This has largely been my experience as well. The "kids" are all playing Minecraft, Call of Duty, Fortnite, Overwatch, etc, while people in their mid 20s and older are playing Nintendo. I think most of us that are older grew up with Nintendo and we stick with it because it's never let us down. Nintendo games have a way to feeling timeless, whereas PS and Xbox games tend to show their age once the next generation comes along. Come to think of it I can't remember the last time I've heard anyone younger than like 20 say they want a Nintendo system. I work with all 25+ y/o's and many people well into their 30s and 40s and Switch is by far the most popular console in my workplace amongst adults.

One of the problem I see with this... is how game streaming of titles otherwise available for purchase on the Switch e-shop will be received by the studios actually making those games, or even Nintendo themselves who usually get royalties through sales of those titles...

I mean, unless Microsoft only stream games from their own studios, or games not available on Switch otherwise, I don't see how Nintendo would give this a go...

Now, maybe I'd be interested in Microsoft's service (still have an unused code for a month of Gamepass for my XB1) which seems pretty solid actually (because it isn't streaming), but I can't see their streaming platform working on another platform that makes money on royalties from game sales.... as that would cannibalize said sales...

The article was a good read, but focused mainly on what drives Microsoft to doing this. Nintendo stands to gain a lot here as well. Besides all the Microsoft and possibly other Xbox/PC games they might get on their system, suddenly there's also a gaming service on Switch that surpasses their own in almost every way without them having to do any of the work.
I'm all for the collaboration and hope it's actually coming to the extent I think it is. Nintendo and Microsoft working together with their combined strengths would be a juggernaut.
Sadly Goldeneye 007 is gated behind more than just Nintendo, Rare and Microsoft. None of them have the rights to distribute a 007 game. They'd have to strike a deal with whomever holds those rights currently, which I don't believe anyone does a the moment, in which case they'd need to deal with EON or MGM (or whoever ultimately owns Bond to give those rights).

@MattFox I don't think that's how this would work. I don't think there'd be any trading NSO for XBL. I think Nintendo would gate XBL/GamePass behind the NSO subscription, as that's the only way it makes sense for them to allow this to happen.

It's not crazy at all because since a few years, Microsoft totally shifted its approach of the business.
They make now a total distinction between hardware and software offers.
Hardware : the XBox is now a PC, powerful, with a low cost, easy to use and that you can put under the TV in the living room.
Software : propose as much software as you can to as much as places as you can. Exclusiv software is just to promote this offer (here the Game Pass)

That's why we had back compatibility and that's why we have Play Anywhere program.

And that's how it will more and more work the next years for everyone. Even Apple is going the same way in 2019, with iTunes or Airplay being soon available on non-Apple hardwares.
It's more Sony and Nintendo that are late on this approach of the business.

I think Sony is gonna go the same way soon or later (PS Now is already available on PC)

Nintendo... naaah. Their IP's are too strong and too related to "Nintendo" even in the mind of the largest audience.
They will continue their way as long as they can (and it might be very long).

The mere concept of consoles is already obsolete. It made sense in the 90's, when movies were limited to theaters and rentals and tv shows were limited to cable, but in the age of streaming, the idea of entertainment being trapped in arbitrary plastic boxes is simply outdated. Xbox has realized this for a while now, and it seems that they understand that they have more to gain by putting their games on as many platforms as possible than by sticking to their own consoles.

I stopped reading after that. 22mil was the number announced in Oct that only covered sales thru Sept. Switch sold ~9m over the holiday. It's about 33m now if not higher, so the article is off by 10m, nearly 50%.

I think Microsoft needs Nintendo's help for the Xbox consoles to stay relevant. Nintendo and the Switch is doing great on its own. I'd rather see a Sony/Nintendo collaboration, fitting with their Japan roots.

Needless to say this is a nightmare to the fanboy narrative. As a gamer this is cool imo. Personally though, I'll pass since this will be mostly likely a streaming game service. Cool for everyone who wants it though.

My guess is that this possible partnership is similar to what we've already got from Microsoft. We'll get games that have previously released on Xbox and the sales are declining. It makes sense for them to do it because no one is buying an Xbox One for the Rare collection/Cuphead/Ori at this point....maybe when those came out but not now. Why not make some money off of those games. All three would have sales on par with what they originally saw at their releases on the Xbox. Actually, the initial sales might be stronger on the Switch.

@smashboy2000 I was just gonna say. Since Nadella took the reins, their focus has been providing their products more like services on multiple devices rather than tied down to a specific hardware or ecosystem. I was a Windows Phone user for many years and remember many MS diehards losing their mind over the concept. But I think it makes some sense

@StevenG Perhaps I should elaborate a bit. I dont mean that consoles shouldn't exist anymore; rather, I mean that they shouldn't be the only means of playing big quality games.

Imagine if Netflix were exclusive to TV. Sure, a big-screen TV is probably the ideal way to experience Netflix programs, but the flexibility to watch Netflix on PC and mobile devices is always appreciated. Likewise, consoles and PC will probably be the best way to play games for some time now, but that doesn't mean that companies shouldn't experiment with streaming to provide as many people as possible with the opportunity to play great games. It seems like technology and current internet infrastructure may not be able to support that to a wide degree, but if anyone can pull it off, I'd say it's Microsoft.

Nice history lesson. I would definitely love to play Blast Corp, Perfect Dark, Golden Eye, Banjo, Cuphead, Ori, etc on Switch. I'm still really curious to see what folks might be able to play on Xbox 1 X. Could some lesser Nintendo game make the jump? I'd buy the Switch Kirby game if it ran at 60 fps on Xbox...

It's not too far fetched really considering the signs are there that MS will eventually just drop the Xbox console altogether in favor of Xbox as a service. Games like Cuphead and Ori are a shoe in for the Nintendo audience and of course there is that Rare back catalog that plenty of Nintendo fans would be happy to buy again

Yep, pretty much in line w/ what I've been saying the past few days. It really kind of surprises me that we even need an article like this, it just seems so obvious, like peanut butter and chocolate, but some people are very defensive w/ what they like and offensive towards that which they don't. $ is $ though.

Someone is going to have to explain to me how this is 'Microsoft and Nintendo working together'. All I see is Microsoft wanting to publish their games on the Nintendo platform. And Nintendo's part in all of this, is that they let them...

I won't lie, I would totally love to play Rare Replay and Halo portably, Jet Force Gemini in bed sounds too good to be true! So I want this to be true if for no other reason but to be able to play the classic RARE games again on my system of choice, as long as they are native and not streamed. Otherwise I am not interested.

Narrator: The air is filled with numerous rumors and sayings that gives hopes to people for certain characters to come back. Could this be the year where many will have tears of joy? Find out on the next episode of Nintendall Z.

I would imagine Pokemon Company would want a relationship akin to Minecraft being on all systems. As part of this Microsoft deal would it be bonkers to expect a Pokémon Red and a Pokémon Green (with cross play of course!) and a Pokémon Blue (if Sony let's them!)? Pokémon would take over the world and if anyone did'nt have any friends, they could buy multiple consoles so they can trade themselves. One day...the console wars will come to an end...

A Goldeneye port could be very possible at this point. Release it both on Switch and XBONE with crossplay multiplayer and have some kind of split profits. I'm sure either Microsoft, Nintendo or both would be willing to pay for permission from the Bond licence to release it which should be easy since no one is making James Bond games anymore.

I just hope Nintendo is very cautious with whatever deal they make. I would hate to see something that would affect third party development and sales. That said, I would absolutely love to to play Rare Replay on Switch. Hopefully they would add DK 64 for a Switch version.

Here in the US I can't see game streaming taking off in a big way for a while. I've used Nvidia's game streaming service. It's certainly impressive. Though even with high speed internet it's not fit for certain types of games. I can't see consoles going away anytime soon.

Why would you want the eShop competing on it's own console with Xbox's streaming service?

No one would want to buy a 20-euro indy game from the eShop again. Consumers would see real value in the game pass, with 100 AAA games to stream for a low monthly fee.

People would change their spending habits, they'll spend less on indy titles and 3rd party titles, eShop sales will stagger, Nintendo and 3rd parties will lose money, while Microsoft is the best-selling entity on NINTENDO'S platform. Microsoft knows EXACTLY what they're doing. They want to gouge Nintendo of their money, fanbase, and momentum.

@ilikeike To me,the Switch is just a NextGen 3ds....it's arguable that Nintendo has already moved towards killing off the console already. It wouldn't surprise me if the next generation of Nintendo hardware is more streaming, doesn't dock- has something like a Firestick as a dock. Everybody has their "Switch" as a controller.

@backup368 I was also thinking that a lot of indie developers might not like this- But then a lot of the games we get are not really exclusive to Nintendo. I would have liked this GamePass deal a few years ago on the WiiU. Now, I have such a backlog that getting this would be a waste of money with all of the games I have across four systems. I will pass on Game Pass.

@GrailUK This may sound strange for some people but I wouldn't be against Pokémon being on a Microsoft console because they have a heavily focus on children which isn't sitting well with what the longtime fans have been asking. Also, this could help Microsoft to reach the younger japanese audience, which as we know, are in love with Pokémon.

Such a long article, all rubbish. The true reason Microsoft is working with Nintendo is because of Damon Baker. He worked at Nintendo for 12 years, quit in December last year to join Microsoft. The collaboration is all because of him, a link between 2 worlds.

This article brings up some interesting points. Cuphead would sell like hotcakes on the Switch that’s for sure.

When you think about the Japanese consumer, the Switch seems tailor made for that market. You can play it anywhere, doesn’t require the latest TV to get the most out of it (good for children), and it has a range of familiar Nintendo IP that have been there since the Famicom days. There is also a ton of JRPGs that don’t hold much of a namesake abroad, but are household names in Japan. There it is essentially a graduated version of the Gameboy and DS line that everyone and their brother already owns or owned. The XBox is the opposite. A hulking machine that offers no original IP of any clout or name recognition in Japan. The games on XBox that Japanese consumers like are also available on PS4, so what would be the point of buying the console?

It still bewilders me that after the success of the 360, Microsoft went all in on the promotion of the One as an all-in-one media machine. The 360 had great games and is up there with the PS2 in terms of quality releases. People don’t need another machine next to the TV that can do the same as a Roku or their PC.

Give me a way to play Master Chief Coll. on the go and I'll give you money. Add in Reach finally though. You added ODST, c'mon. Forza too. I miss those franchises a lot, but my kid killed my XB1, and Im never home enough/have the time at home to play, to justify buying a new one. I have a Switch and a laptop tho!

My personal wishes aside, I do hope to see this happen. It benefits nearly everyone involved, and Sony could use a fresh kick in the rear to keep them on defense. Cocky Sony has never been good for anyone.

Nintendo won't allow the Xbox streaming service. There are a ton of Switch games on Xbox and the service is $9.99 a month. It would also be awkward for Nintendo to have a streaming Doom running in a higher resolution than the $59.99 switch version.

Rare is irrelevant and no you won't be getting any games. It's too late for Goldeneye too.

I wonder if, starting with next gen, have companies learned not to let last gen suscess cloud their judgement, when making decisions about their next console. Ive noticed that each one of the big 3 have let their ego’s get in the way after huge last gen success, if they were declared the victors. And they all have had to eat a slice of humble pie. Some systems recovered (3DS), and then you have situations like XBox One. It’ll be interesting to watch from the next gen on.

The article is an interesting read. Nevertheless it's completely from a gamers point of view. We, as gamers, have no downside.Of course that kind of a deal would be a great benefit for Microsoft, but as I mentioned in a commentary in the past, I don't see why Nintendo should do this. What interest should Nintendo have in helping Microsoft spreading their software to an audience where they (MS) failed in the past?I don't get it from the economic point of view. And this article doesn't help me because it's focused on the benefits for MS and the gamers.

Looking back, I'd say Xbox one's multimedia stance was culturally too soon (people weren't ready for it) and technically too late (smart TVs scooped most of the functionality it was adding).I don't see what's in it for Nintendo besides access to titles Microsoft publishes. Is that enough?

...Or is this how the industry evolving away from proprietary hardware happens? Microsoft makes a streaming only box that can download eShop stuff, Nintendo makes their next console compatible to double as an MS streaming box.

What happened to Microsoft buying Nintendo? It's been twenty years. They still haven't bought Nintendo or any of their franchises. Instead, it's the other way around: Nintendo now gets Microsoft games! Didn't people predict something else entirely?

@HexagonSun Honestly, I agree with you. I really hope it doesn't hurt Nintendo too badly, especially since it's likely that Microsoft will still make consoles... I would imagine Microsoft would have to pay Nintendo royalty fees for having Xbox games streaming on Switch.

@HctiwsI think you could be on to something. If MS and Nintendo can expand distribution on each others platforms it adds to the profitability. Microsoft is realizing that Nintendo is still a market innovator and one way to beat the leader is to join forces. This will only work if Battletoads comes to the Switch. Just sayin'